Centrist Pundits

You know, it is especially aggravating when the hypocrisy shows up in a manufactured argument.

The whole “Hope Obama Fails” train got a’rollin’ when Rush Limbaugh stated he wanted Obama to fail on his radio show.  This should not surprise anyone.  While I’ve stated my opinion of Rush, the fact remains he is an entertainer, he’s paid to say the outrageous, and since that’s where his audience is, he’s paid to say the outrageous with a right wing slant.  Believe you me, if the money dried up for right wing talk radio and there was suddenly cash to be made in left wing talk radio, we’d see a change in heart.

And suddenly, it was all about Rush saying “nearly traitorous” things.  Some Republicans fell over themselves to say the opposite, that Obama needed to succeed, even though they THEN had to go on Rush’s show and apologize to appease their critics.  But that’s not even the major problem.  The major problem is how many people came out as hypocrites over this situation.

Because remember, back in the Bush Presidency, when we were having this same argument?  To criticize Bush, to criticize a President during war time, well, that just isn’t done!  It’s traitorous!  But no!  Criticism is an essential part of the American argument, and it is part of free speech, and it is being in the loyal opposition.  Opposing Bush isn’t opposing America, it is, in fact, patriotic.  The same arguments made by the same people, except the opposite side.  That’s for both Democrats and Republicans, by the way.  Neither party is clean on this.

If criticizing Bush is treasonous, then so is criticizing Obama.  If criticizing Bush was legitimate debate by patriots, than so is criticizing Obama.  Except, of course, that no one wants to admit that they were exaggerating before, so they are exaggerating again now, just for the opposite side.

So now we have the “Hope Obama Fails” snowball gathering up speed.  Bobby Jindal is out there saying it, so it Fred Thompson.  But the thing is, here’s how to derail this whole thing before it gets any more ridiculous.  We can’t derail it before it gets ridiculous because that ship has sailed.  But we can keep it from getting worse.  Stop saying you want Obama to fail.  Instead, say that you want to prevent policies you believe are unsound from being implemented, and you think that policies you believe are unsound will fail because (insert reason here).  Politicians seem to like to think you and I are fairly stupid, but hey, try it and see if we can handle it.  Tell us what seems dangerous to you, and let us know what you think will happen.

You know, I guess I need to give a little credit where it is due here.  Rush Limbaugh may be a bloated gas bag, but it was the Democratic response that was overboard.  Why?  Because Rush actually didn’t say what we think he said.  He wants Obama’s liberal policies to fail.  That may be splitting hairs, but it is an important hair.  Rush wants the country to succeed, and he knows that the President is a part of that.  He just doesn’t want large handouts and taxes on the rich and gay people marrying and so on.  He may be wrong on all those issues, but he was still focusing on the issues.  Rush is very, very capable of sounding bad all on his own, but in this one case, the soundbyte makes him sound worse than the context.

JC National Politics, Political Parties Jindal, obama, rush

First up, the main act, the main man, President Barack Obama.  The man can speak.  We all know that.  To think that he would deliver anything other than a eloquent speech would be crazy.  But what about what he said?  Overall, it was good.  I know some people decry his lack of specifics (and some people decry the decrying) but honestly, this seems to be Obama’s M.O. – he discusses broad policy in the big speeches, and the specifics come later.  While this may be very frustrating to some, I find it a welcome change from the 8 years of not even learning what broad policies were until after they were implemented.

He is trying to go back to being a cheerleader on the economy, while at the same time not lying about the issues.  This is a tricky line to walk.  He says his people have already identified large amounts to cut from the Government in spending, I’ll be very curious as to what they are.  Cutting our deficit in half by the end of his first term is wildly optimistic and probably unrealistic.

That said, his idea of focusing on energy, health care, and education (and the unsaid fourth focus, economic recovery) is probably a good one.  We spend a ridiculous amount of money on energy, and much of it goes to our enemies.  We probably can’t stop spending a ridiculous amount on energy, but maybe we can spend more of it here.  Maybe.  Getting more people a post-high-school education will, as he said, only help the nation.  And while we don’t know how to fix it quite yet, more and more people are becoming convinced that our crazy spending on a patchwork health care system is a drag on our economy and our quality of life.

A lot has been said about his thought that we can cure cancer.  First of all, I’m not doctor, but I’m less sure that we can “cure” cancer as much as make it “manageable”, like diabetes.  But secondly, Obama has to be aware of the comparisons people make of his Presidency to the TV show “The West Wing”.  This is one of those awkward moments that sort of bring up why that’s a common joke.

All in all, Obama did fine last night.  There wasn’t really a wow, but it was solid.  Obama the President is a little less inspirational than Obama the Candidate, but he almost has to be by definition, more grounded in realities.

And moving on to the other big event of the night, the coming out party, probable candidate Bobby Jindal!… ooops.  Put him back in, the coming out party failed – though I think he’ll recover.

I strongly suspect that the problems with this speech were NOT Jindal’s fault.  He isn’t quite the orator Obama is (or if he is, he didn’t show it tonight) but I think the failure of this speech was on behalf of whoever wrote it, vetted it, and thought it was a good idea.  It has some really awkward stuff, and it has some stuff that may play well on the surface but is kind of nonsense once you dig.

Its good that he talked honestly about the Republican (and the unnamed Neocon branch of the party that’s been in power) failure to deliver on their ideals over the last 8 years.  I don’t think he followed it up with much about how the party PLANS to regain America’s trust, instead going the easier route of bashing the stimulus package.

Easier, but perhaps less appropriate.  Yes, Obama talked about the stimulus.  He talked about a lot of things.  Jindal’s speech wasn’t so much a response to Obama as a second speech from the opposition; that is, it didn’t address many of Obama’s points.  Perhaps we should give up on the instant response and just wait for it a week later, so an actual response can be crafted.

Jindal’s speech have some effective use of language at parts, using connotation to quietly undermine Democratic points and strengthen Republican ones.  One could expect no less.

Still, the talking points about the waste in the stimulus are becoming stale – and one big one is even fairly crazy.  Yes, perhaps the new cars for the government or the high speed rail projects should have been in other bills – though you can’t tell me the building of high speed rails won’t create jobs – but the dismissal of the volcano monitoring… okay, again, maybe, *maybe* that belonged in another bill, but if you live in Hawaii or Seattle or other places with volcanoes, it saves lives.  This isn’t theory, its fact – Clark air base, Phillipines, 1991.  Attacking life-saving measures is never popular, even if it gets you a somewhat clever metaphor using the word eruption.

I also have doubts about a man touting his rejection of stimulus money, and attacking the stimulus, when he’s only rejecting a small fraction of the money outlined for his state.  Louisiana is set to get $3.8 billion, and he’s going to accept $3.7 billion of it.  Whatever floats his boat, politically, that his voters will let him get away with and remain in office, but that’s a thing razor to score political points on.

He attacked the spending, saying it would saddle future generations with debt, and asking who would do that.  The answer: most American governments over time.  Not quite nonsense on his part, but close.

And then the most awkward moment of the evening: saying that Democrats promise big government will rescue us from economic storms… with the follow up “those of us who lived through Katrina have our doubts.”  Really?   REALLY?  Katrina was a national tragedy of epic proportions, and while there’s plenty of blame to go around on the infrastructure issues that caused it, the problems with the immediate responses to Katrina go, part and parcel, to Republicans.  THINK, Jindal, think before you speak.

I’ve given equal time to Jindal here, perhaps more than he deserves, because in the end, a response to a first time Presidential speech is rather unimportant.  But this was supposed to be a big deal to Jindal, and I can’t help but feel he was the outfielder who dropped a ball.  He stated that Republicans, when they disagree with Democrats, should be there to offer up their alternative ideas.  I think many are still waiting for that to happen.

JC Congress, Economy, National Politics, Political Parties finance, Jindal, language, obama

Back before we started this blog, Greg and I would often discuss politics.  Sometimes it would be with others.  I remember one particular discussion in which Greg and I posited that the first African-American President would be a Republican.  Since the Republican party is the party of old white men, some of our friends were confused by our claim.  But we were basing it on some simple math.

If a Presidential candidate were African-American, and Democratic, it wouldn’t change the electoral math in any way, given that most African-Americans vote Democratic anyway.

If, on the other hand, a Presidential candidate were African-American, and Republican, it would skew things.  While certainly not all, many voters for whom race is important would change over to the Republicans.  And while there might be some switch-over to the Democrats by a small group of voters – we call them racists – who didn’t want to see a black man President, it wouldn’t be enough to offset the influx.

Of course, Greg and I were both gloriously wrong, and the first African-American President is a Democrat.  Perhaps America is more racially mature than we expected.  Or perhaps we simply forgot that African-American Republicans are a rare enough group that we just don’t see them on the ballot.  Amongst the prominent African-American Republicans, Powell wasn’t interested, Rice was associated with a disastrous White House, and Keyes is just crazy.

Bobby Jindal is all set to give the response to Obama’s not-quite-a-State-of-the-Union address tomorrow.  Its been called in some circles his coming out party; Jindal is believed to be a major player in the future of the Republicans and some pundits say the only reason he wasn’t the VP pick last year was name recognition.  (I disagree with those pundits as I had heard of Jindal, and not of Palin, but a sample of one is not a good sample size)

Bobby Jindal’s actual first name is Piyush, and he’s not your father’s Republican.  He’s young.  He’s Indian-American.  He’s the son of immigrants.  He’s more the description of some hypothetical success story that no one thinks could actually happen than a real person.  Oh, and most sources agree that whether or not you agree with him politically, he is wicked smart in general and especially about politics.

His negatives are mostly fairly minor.  Some questions about his ability to lead (he actually faced recall at one point) but no worse than the questions about Obama’s being ready on day one.  And something about exorcisms in there, but while that amuses me greatly, I don’t know that it would knock him out of any race.  It certainly hasn’t kept him out of Congress or the Governorship of Louisiana.

If Michael Steele is the knock-off, second-rate Obama of the Republican party, Bobby Jindal is the real-deal answer to Obama.  And it may not make the racists happy that the person who will carry the banner of the Republican party isn’t an old white guy, they may have to learn to live with that fact.  As I implied yesterday in my discussion of the next election, Jindal’s real choice is simply 2012 or 2016, which is he more likely to win?  But he will be the candidate somewhere down the line.  Count on it.

JC 2012 Election, National Politics, Political Parties 2012, culture, elections, Jindal